Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2018 November 25

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
< November 24 November 26 >

November 25[edit]

Category:Wikipedia guidance essays[edit]

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was: delete category and redirect {{guidance essay}} to {{essay}}. Articles in this category populated by the {{guidance essay}} template will be automatically recategorized into Category:Wikipedia essays. (non-admin closure) feminist (talk) 17:30, 6 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Useless over-generalization. All WP essays offer WP-related "guidance" (often very opinionated, of course), or they would be MfDed as WP:NOT#WEBHOST trash. The pages put into this category are inconsistent with each other, in any meaningful way, and are either already also more specifically sub-categorized under Category:Wikipedia essays or can safely upmerge into it, as can both of Category:Wikipedia guidance essays's sub-categories. This is basically also a TfM of {{Guidance essay}}, which should just be redirected to {{Essay}} (after any tweaking to make the parameters all work correctly). The template (which does nothing but populate this category) also lacks features present in the main one anyway, which is a maintenance hassle. PS: Pages in the nominated category that provide instructions, per se, belong in Category:Wikipedia how-to essays (as well as any applicable topical ones).  — SMcCandlish ☏ ¢ 😼  22:50, 25 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support replacing the template/category with the generic essay one. There are many problems with essay categorization, but this doesn't seem helpful. Specific "advice" essays might be a reasonable subcat of essays, but it's probably better to burn this one and start over in the future. power~enwiki (π, ν) 23:50, 25 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment some of these essays are currently only in this category. If the category is going to be deleted, these essays should be added to Category:Wikipedia essays (or possibly to Category:Orphaned Wikipedia essays, I'm not sure about the purpose of that category). If these articles wouldn't be reclassified they would be truly orphaned. Marcocapelle (talk) 19:08, 26 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

Category:Egyptian Premier League footballers[edit]

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was: relist, see Wikipedia:Categories_for_discussion/Log/2018_December_16#Category:Egyptian Premier League footballers (non-admin closure). Marcocapelle (talk) 09:18, 16 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: I don't think that "footballers" is the correct word to use here. "Players" is more suitable in my opinion and is used in other leagues' categories. I originally moved it by myself but it was reverted after less than five minutes. Ben5218 (talk) 21:37, 25 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

Climbs in cycle racing in ...[edit]

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was: Purge. Consensus is to purge any articles that don't have significant content about cycling from these categories, and to create List of climbs in cycle racing (current draft at Draft:List of climbs in cycle racing). If any categories are emptied as a result, I will request speedy-deletion. (non-admin closure) power~enwiki (π, ν) 20:20, 7 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Additional comment there may be a need for more stringent inclusion criteria than simply being on the Tour de France once or twice; however many of those articles are stubs with no real content or claims of significnce other than being climbs in cycle racing in France. Editors should feel free to do further cleanup themselves. power~enwiki (π, ν) 22:55, 7 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Purge and delete if then empty:
Nominator's rationale:  Articles such as Grossglockner (a mountain), Mount Etna and La Plagne (a ski resort whose article makes no mention of cycling) don't belong under Category:Cycle racing.  See previous discussions e.g. re mountain biking and re places on trails.  I propose removing the cycle racing cat tag from all the articles that aren't specifically about cycle racing.  For many (possibly all) of these categories this would leave the category empty and it could then be deleted. For any categories that are not completely emptied a note should be put in the category text referring to this CFD. Of course, if people prefer straight deletion of these categories I'd be happy with that as well. DexDor (talk) 21:02, 25 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment, I can't tell for other countries but most of these climbs in the Netherlands and Flanders are solely notable because of their history in cycling. So oppose straight deletion. Marcocapelle (talk) 21:49, 25 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Where would you draw the line? for example, an article like Vaalserberg (the lede doesn't mention cycling). What about, for example, Kemmelberg - the article mentions cycling, but it also mentions Celtic tribes, WW1, chemical warfare, NATO...? Why should it be categorized for cycling but not for other activities that have taken place there? DexDor (talk) 22:04, 25 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • The Vaalserberg should definitely be purged (which makes me realize that the Dutch category will become awfully small). The Kemmelberg is notable for multiple things, that may happen. Possibly (if nothing in the other countries will survive) we may collapse the Dutch and Belgian category into Category:Climbs of the classic cycle races. Marcocapelle (talk) 06:53, 26 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
User:Lugnuts, What about articles such as Puy de Dôme and Pra-Loup? I'm trying to understand where you think the line should be drawn between the articles you listed (about places that may be best known, especially outside France, for cycle racing) and (at the other extreme) articles that don't even mention cycling. If we're categorizing some articles that are about places (e.g. mountains) under cycle racing (or mountain biking, paragliding, hiking ...) (as well as categorizing as a place) then we need a rule to decide whether an article belongs in the activity category or not. The simplest rule (that is compatible with DEFINING) would be to categorize under cycle racing only if the article is specifically about cycle racing (e.g. an article about a race, about a velodrome or about cycle racing at a particular location). DexDor (talk) 20:18, 26 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
That is a serious concern. A criterion could be that a climb must have been part of an important cycle race during most years of a long period - which basically limits the topic to the classic cycle races. Mountain passes and ski resorts would drop out because multiple stage races like the Tour de France have a completely different course every year. For example Alpe d'Huez has been part of the Tour on average only once every 5 years and that is probably more frequent than any other climb in the Tour. Just keeping Category:Climbs of the classic cycle races was not a bad idea at all if I may say so. Marcocapelle (talk) 22:07, 26 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, that would fit under Category:Classic cycle races - although it should be noted that "there is no clear consensus about what constitutes a classic cycling race.".  If such a category was created and populated would you then support purging/deleting the categories in this CFD?
Re Alpe d'Huez etc I don't think that being best known (worldwide) for cycling (if it is) necessarily means that they belong in a cycling category - for example, places that are best known (outside the immediate vicinity) for an event (e.g. a crime or accident) that happened there aren't usually categorized for it. DexDor (talk) 07:42, 27 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
I've created Draft:List of climbs in cycle racing. DexDor (talk) 17:24, 5 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

Category:Romanian Orthodoxy[edit]

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was: Delete. Timrollpickering 21:25, 2 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: delete for now, in the first place there is no fundamental objection against this category, since we also have Category:Greek Orthodoxy and Category:Russian Orthodoxy. However, the difference is that the latter two categories have a well-populated tree due to much additional content e.g. in the United States. The Romanian category does not have any similar additional content and so, for the time being, it adds nothing to Category:Romanian Orthodox Church. Marcocapelle (talk) 19:55, 25 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

Category:Lists of neighborhoods in Mexico City[edit]

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was: Upmerge. Timrollpickering (Talk) 14:22, 20 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Category has just one entry. Upmerge? --Another Believer (Talk) 19:24, 25 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

Category:Newspapers of New England[edit]

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was: Rename to Category:Newspapers published by Newspapers of New England, Inc.. Timrollpickering (Talk) 14:46, 20 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Ambiguity problem. This is a category for newspapers owned by a specific publishing company whose name is Newspapers of New England -- but because the company's name looks exactly like the way we would name a geographic category, it has an unfortunate tendency to collect newspapers published in the New England region but not owned by this company. There isn't a clearcut naming convention among its sibling categories in Category:Newspapers by newspaper company in the United States, but I'm not convinced that the most common forms, "Newspapers of New England publications" or "Newspapers of New England newspapers", would adequately resolve the ambiguity here, so I'm proposing the "Newspapers published by (company)" format (which is mirrored by at least one sibling) in this instance. I would also request that the current category name not be retained as a redirect to the new one -- since a bot automatically moves articles that are misfiled in a category redirect to the target category, any erroneous misuse of this category name after the move would just repollute the new category and defeat the purpose of renaming it. Bearcat (talk) 17:30, 25 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support per nom. The current title is too ambiguous. power~enwiki (π, ν) 17:54, 25 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment I created this category and many of the pages that inhabit it. On second glance, after all these years, I agree with Bearcat's concerns about ambiguity. My only concern with this proposal is that it could end up being too restrictive if future pages related to this company are added in the future. For instance, what if an article were written about the company's CEO, or a prominent journalist (e.g. if one of their reporters becomes notable by winning a Pulitzer) ... or what if the company were to acquire a television or radio station, or a website meeting our standards of notability. We would want to include those pages in the category as well, even though they are not "newspapers published by NNE," rather than starting a new category ("people of NNE" or "television stations owned by NNE"). I am no expert (obviously) on the category naming conventions. Would it be possible to change it to Category:Newspapers of New England Inc.? ``` t b w i l l i e ` $1.25 ` 21:05, 25 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
If we get into that situation, we would most likely want to keep the new content categorized separately from the papers — such as in "television stations owned by NNE", "NNE people", etc. So what you propose might become necessary down the line as a parent category for the newspapers category, but it's not the best immediate solution to a category for the newspapers themselves. Bearcat (talk) 22:08, 28 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

Category:10,000 Maniacs media[edit]

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was: Merge. Timrollpickering 21:27, 2 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: No scheme for "Media by artist", and not needed for what would amount to 2 subcats in most cases such as this one. Larger eponymous categories (e.g. Category:Rihanna) tend to have album cover and audio sample categories placed in them as well so upmerging is the simplest option. StarcheerspeaksnewslostwarsTalk to me 16:48, 25 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support There's no real prospect of video or 3-D models being hosted here so there's no reason for the division. ―Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 18:14, 25 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

Category:Medical buildings in Sri Lanka by district[edit]

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was: Merge. Timrollpickering 21:28, 2 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Not enough Medical buildings to populate district subcategories. Only one entry in 10 of the 12 sub categories, and they are all catered for by Category:Hospitals in Sri Lanka by district Rathfelder (talk) 16:13, 25 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • @Rathfelder: Please combine the nominations so that we can have one discussion instead of a repetition of identical discussions. Marcocapelle (talk) 19:28, 25 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • They aren't identical. Districts go to different provinces. Rathfelder (talk) 19:31, 25 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support per nom. In combination with the nomination below this will lead to plain deletion of this category, if I'm correct. Marcocapelle (talk) 21:27, 25 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

Category:Medical buildings in Mullaitivu District[edit]

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was: Merge. Timrollpickering 21:28, 2 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Not enough medical buildings to populate District subcategories. These categories all have no more than 2 entries, in each case a category of hospitals in the district. No actual articles. Rathfelder (talk) 16:05, 25 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Makes sense, also because there is apparently no other country that has a medical buildings tree. Marcocapelle (talk) 22:45, 26 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

Category:Adobe Systems[edit]

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was: Rename. Timrollpickering (Talk) 11:19, 16 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Moved from WP:CFDS
 – UnitedStatesian (talk) 16:43, 25 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Contested WP:C2D speedy: Company changed its name and now article is at Adobe Inc.. UnitedStatesian (talk) 15:47, 25 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
    • Oppose only because "Adobe Inc." is really daft name for the article and just makes the categories look stupid by including "Inc.", the company is name is actually "Adobe" but that is not for here. MilborneOne (talk) 11:25, 22 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support - Adobe is something else. Perhaps the daftness of the name should be brought to the attention of the company. In the meantime, rename per nom and per the article name. Oculi (talk) 10:28, 27 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support The main article of the category is Adobe Inc.. Armbrust The Homunculus 12:40, 13 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

Category:Eastern Orthodoxy[edit]

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was: rename Category:Eastern Orthodox Church organisation to Category:Eastern Orthodox Church. (non-admin closure) feminist (talk) 17:16, 6 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: WP:C2D: Eastern Orthodox Church. Chicbyaccident (talk) 13:52, 25 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

Category:Eastern Orthodox Christian communities[edit]

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was: Kept. Timrollpickering (Talk) 14:19, 20 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Implying an archaic collectivist taxonomy disregarding individuals that is simply not due on Wikipedia. Better merge with the holder category for individuals. Chicbyaccident (talk) 13:44, 25 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep - these are not individuals. Kafr Kanna for instance is a town, not a Christian. Oculi (talk) 14:26, 25 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Initially keep per Oculi. However at first glance it seems in Lebanon the villages and towns of this category mostly consist of a Christian population (i.e. a mix of Maronite Catholic and Eastern Orthodox people) rather than an exclusive Eastern Orthodox population, so it may be worthwhile to dig into this a bit further. Marcocapelle (talk) 14:38, 25 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
How can you two say that these are not individuals? Individuals, that is, who make up any sort of exceptional personal lifestyles, descisions, views, how can you simply disregard these? Millet (Ottoman Empire) system was dropped a century ago. Isn't 21st century applicable here? Chicbyaccident (talk) 20:24, 6 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Have you not checked the articles in this category? They are about villages and towns, they are not biographies. Marcocapelle (talk) 11:04, 7 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, but still the same issue. How 21st century is it to call a village or town "Christian" from an encyclopedical category viewpoint? Wouldn't such generalisations best be explained in article content? Chicbyaccident (talk) 13:26, 7 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose as nom. The content of this category is for populated places associated with a distinct ethno-religious group, as is frequently the case in some areas. In the case of this category, mostly Present-day Lebanon, Israel, Palestine and Syria are definitely regions where this ethno-religious classification of villages makes sense. In any case, if you object to this categorization of ethno-religious communities, the entire Category:Christian communities, and maybe Category:Communities by religion should be nominated. At the very least, the many subcategories about villages should be nominated. Place Clichy (talk) 17:25, 18 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

Category:Eastern Orthodox church bodies[edit]

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was: rename to Category:Eastern Orthodox Church bodies and purge non-canonical/independent church bodies to Category:Eastern Orthodoxy (or an appropriate subcategory). I will list this at WP:CFD/W/M for processing; however, any assistance from the discussion's participants would be appreciated. -- Black Falcon (talk) 23:36, 25 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: WP:C2C, as seen in Category:Christian denominations by denominational family. Chicbyaccident (talk) 13:34, 25 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Meanwhile I realize that the category mixes up bodies of the Eastern Orthodox Church and Eastern Orthodox noncanonical/independent churches. Therefore ALT rename to Category:Eastern Orthodox Church bodies (with capital C) and move the noncanonical/independent churches to Category:Eastern Orthodoxy. Marcocapelle (talk) 15:05, 25 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Marcocapelle: Rather, doesn't it seems like we need a Category:Independent Eastern Orthodox denominations? Doesn't that provide the solution to the original problem that you addressed? Chicbyaccident (talk) 15:08, 25 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Agree. Chicbyaccident (talk) 15:19, 25 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Can support the ALT as a temporary measure. Laurel Lodged (talk) 21:35, 29 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Support ALT as best proposed name so far. Chicbyaccident (talk) 20:21, 6 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Strong Oppose. Denomination is a horrible term to use when talking about Orthodoxy (or Catholicism for that matter). It is clearly an Americanism, and adopts a Protestant, congregationalist POV. The Orthodox are organised in church bodies, not denominations. Place Clichy (talk) 17:25, 18 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Americanism, really? Isn't it the most WP:NPOV broadscale verbiage? C.f. Christian denomination. Preexisting article titles and categories seem to favour it. Chicbyaccident (talk) 12:34, 23 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

Category:Eastern Orthodox noncanonical church bodies[edit]

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was: Merge. Timrollpickering 21:29, 2 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Essentially identical enough scope. Better keep it simple. Chicbyaccident (talk) 13:32, 25 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support merging per nom. Discussion about the best name for the merged category can be done in the discussion below. Marcocapelle (talk) 14:44, 25 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Query Are they still Eastern Orthodox? Or are they Former Eastern Orthodox? Laurel Lodged (talk) 22:43, 28 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Similar to independent Catholics (who are Catholic but not part of the Catholic Church) these are Eastern Orthodox but not part of the Eastern Orthodox Church. Marcocapelle (talk) 23:19, 28 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support per nom as as temporary holding measure pending a fuller discussion. Laurel Lodged (talk) 21:34, 29 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

Category:Eastern Orthodox independent churches[edit]

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was: no consensus. -- Black Falcon (talk) 00:02, 26 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: WP:C2C: per formula of Category:Independent Catholic denominations. Both formulera and broader, expansive terminology for the very same reasons as compared category. Chicbyaccident (talk) 13:20, 25 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
True. The current cat name is still better than the proposed target though. Laurel Lodged (talk) 17:49, 2 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Reverse merge. Churches or church bodies is preferable to denomination in the Orthodox context (or in Catholicism for that matter). Denomination is clearly an Americanism, and adopts a Protestant, congregationalist POV. The Orthodox are organised in church bodies, not denominations. Place Clichy (talk) 17:25, 18 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

Category:Titular Sees of the Coptic Orthodox Church[edit]

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was: Rename. Timrollpickering 21:30, 2 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: WP:C2C: Category:Titular sees in Africa, Category:Titular sees. WP:C2D: Titular see. Pertaining to the Coptic Orthodox Church of Alexandria. Chicbyaccident (talk) 13:18, 25 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

Category:Timelines of Christian history[edit]

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was: Rename. Timrollpickering 21:30, 2 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator's rationale: Per main article Timeline of Christianity, but most importantly the scope. This is more than just the history of Christianity or Christian history, this is - timelines of Christianity, plain and simple. Chicbyaccident (talk) 13:12, 25 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support per nom, and also because the word 'history' is redundant: timelines already imply that it is about history. Marcocapelle (talk) 14:54, 25 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support per nom & Marco. Laurel Lodged (talk) 22:39, 28 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

Category:Aliases of 76.66[edit]

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was:  Relisted at Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2018 December 16, in order to solicit input from the WikiProject. -- Black Falcon (talk) 19:11, 16 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Convert Category:Aliases of 76.66 to article Wikipedia:Aliases of 76.66
Nominator's rationale: I don't see how this topic is relevant to the whole AfC project. Might be better off as a historical page in the project namespace. Flooded with them hundreds 08:01, 25 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete Outdated - we don't need to convert this or retain this information. Pkbwcgs (talk) 16:34, 26 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

Christianity per city[edit]

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more categories. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was: Merge. Timrollpickering 21:32, 2 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]
more cities
Nominator's rationale: merge per WP:SMALLCAT, all the above categories contain one subcategory (usually a churches subcategory) and 0, 1 or 2 articles. Marcocapelle (talk) 05:15, 25 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Comment Shouldn't Category:Christianity in the United States by city be included also? What about New York? With 9 sub-cats, it's quite well developed. Laurel Lodged (talk) 11:24, 25 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

  • That is definitely not the intention of this nomination. Just the small categories have been nominated. Marcocapelle (talk) 12:00, 25 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
If small is the rationale then OK. What about Amsterdam - it has plenty of potential to grow? Laurel Lodged (talk) 22:36, 28 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Then you have probably never been to Amsterdam :-). Seriously, even on Dutch WP Amsterdam does not have a Christianity category. It is not the seat of any bishop and it also has no particular ties to Protestantism. Marcocapelle (talk) 23:29, 28 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Last time I was there I saw lots of churches, including one in an attic!. But I'll bow to local knowledge. Laurel Lodged (talk) 15:44, 1 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Merge all these - and the later nominations. All too small to be useful. And many misleading. An article about a church or temple in a city doesnt tell us much about religion in the city.Rathfelder (talk) 15:28, 2 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the category's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Categories_for_discussion/Log/2018_November_25&oldid=1073191756"